Recruiting question: 3 Star vs 4 Star Athletes

[Montgomery-Magic]

I've been happy to see a steady flow of 3 Star athletes. I wanted to open this question to you smart football fans. I have often wondered how important stars really are. E.g. How much better is a 3 star athlete than a 4? Might 3 star athletes have a higher ceiling sometimes? I would imagine for instance, there is data on how often a 3 star recruit goes pro vs a 4 Star. (or say, data on their relative collegiate success!) Also regarding recruiting class rating: If our ISU recruiting class for next year is no. 36, middle of the Big12 pack (think i read this somewhere) is that considered underachieving for a program with top 20 ambitions. Any other questions on this topic??

Peace and love to you all.

 

[CYCLNST8]

Pretty sure Bill Snyder isn't even aware of the star ratings system...

 

[Cyclonepride]

I’m sure that, as a group, threes are better long term than twos, and so on, but that the actual difference broken down on an individual basis is so negligible as to be close to random.

I’m willing to bet there’s a far larger difference on how much good coaching staffs get out of any given talent on average.

 

[BCClone]

IIRC, the players getting drafted in the first few rounds of the draft are typically your fives and fours. There are some that go unnoticed for some reasons and some will develop more than others, but typically your four and fives are fairly ready when they walk on campus.

 

[Javinegli]

4 star athletes typically have a higher floor. Rivals would tag a 4 star as an all conference type of player with NFL starter potential. 3 stars would be quality starters with NFL backup potential. Of course their are exceptions both ways but that is a pretty broad way to look at it.

 

[somecyguy]

Without getting into NFL prospects, I think it's very doable with proper player development to be a year to year top25 team or very close to it with a roster of 99% 3 star kids.

Sprinkle in the occasional 4/5 stars and/or a few of those 3 stars bust out, you have a potential conference winner. This coaching staff sure appears to be capable of pulling that off.

 

[jbindm]

Surly alert!

 

[jbindm]

I’m sure that, as a group, threes are better long term than twos, and so on, but that the actual difference broken down on an individual basis is so negligible as to be close to random.

I’m willing to bet there’s a far larger difference on how much good coaching staffs get out of any given talent on average.

This sounds about right. I think there's two components: over the long haul, you'll have more hits with three star and above recruits than you will with the same number of two star recruits. Generally, talent wins.

But development is a huge part of it. Some coaches get every last ounce of talent out of the kids they bring in by coaching them up and putting them in a position where they can maximize their strengths and cover up their weaknesses.

That's the difference between, say, Texas and Alabama. They both get topflight talent. Nick Saban is just so much better at getting the most out of that talent every year.

 

[Doc]

I've been happy to see a steady flow of 3 Star athletes. I wanted to open this question to you smart football fans. I have often wondered how important stars really are. E.g. How much better is a 3 star athlete than a 4? Might 3 star athletes have a higher ceiling sometimes? I would imagine for instance, there is data on how often a 3 star recruit goes pro vs a 4 Star. (or say, data on their relative collegiate success!) Also regarding recruiting class rating: If our ISU recruiting class for next year is no. 36, middle of the Big12 pack (think i read this somewhere) is that considered underachieving for a program with top 20 ambitions. Any other questions on this topic??

Peace and love to you all.

I think that 3 star covers a very large range of athletes, so I think what the 4th star gives the average fan is just a higher confidence that they're going to be a productive player. It just you confidence that a separate entity from your coaching staff likes the player a lot as well. I think any program can find 3-star guys they consider to be 4-star talents, but some just have to find more of those.

5 star recruits are studs and go pro much more frequently that others. I think the 3 and 4 star players aren't nearly as far apart.

 

[Bipolarcy]

I've been happy to see a steady flow of 3 Star athletes. I wanted to open this question to you smart football fans. I have often wondered how important stars really are. E.g. How much better is a 3 star athlete than a 4? Might 3 star athletes have a higher ceiling sometimes? I would imagine for instance, there is data on how often a 3 star recruit goes pro vs a 4 Star. (or say, data on their relative collegiate success!) Also regarding recruiting class rating: If our ISU recruiting class for next year is no. 36, middle of the Big12 pack (think i read this somewhere) is that considered underachieving for a program with top 20 ambitions. Any other questions on this topic??

Peace and love to you all.

I think it's all just a crap shoot anyway. But what I would say is that stars DO matter, at least in so far as I would rather have a class of all 3-stars than a class of half three stars and half 2 stars, like we got with past coaching staffs.

If you don't think stars matter, take a look at the recruiting classes of the perennial football powers. The average star ranking of most of them is around 4. I do think you can compete with three stars with the occasional 4-star thrown in because the difference between a 3-star and a 4-star is very minimal and boils down to someone's opinion, IMO. It's when you start having to compete against classes full of 4-stars with your 2-stars that things get out of hand, again in my opinion.

There are only about 30-35 5-stars in any given year and they're spread out among a couple of dozen different teams, so they really don't come into play as much in this discussion because no team is ever going to have a class full of nothing but 5-stars. But some of the elite of the elite could have as many as 5-7 in a class, I guess.

 

[tolfbfan]

4 star athletes typically have a higher floor. Rivals would tag a 4 star as an all conference type of player with NFL starter potential. 3 stars would be quality starters with NFL backup potential. Of course their are exceptions both ways but that is a pretty broad way to look at it.

Toledo just sent three 3 stars to NFL with starting positions in league now or near future starting positions. CMC and staff are better talent judges than most staffs and all recruiting services. A blind squirrel could figure out who the 5 stars are. Lower half Fours and high end threes are difficult to determine and not much different in my view over the last 10 years of following such things. CMC finds some eventual 4 star type players who fit his position by position requirements that are rated as three stars. The rest are mostly solid threes who fit his criteria. Stars are fun to look at, but it's like lookin at a model on the runway. She may look good from afar, but be a dog up close.
NOTE: This was not a sexist comment 5 years ago. I'm old, just bide your time.

 

[CyCloned]

I think that a 4 star guy generally has more of the ideal measurables than the 3 star guys. In other words the actually stats for a 3 and 4 star guy may be somewhat similar, but the 4 star guy might be an inch or two taller, .1 second faster in the 40, weigh 230 instead of 205, etc. As someone else stated, the 4 star guys have a high floor a lot of the time. ISU has gotten precious few 4 star guys, and most of them have excelled at ISU, so yeah, based on that, there is a difference.

 

[CYCLNST8]

Besides measurables it seems recruits can get an extra star next to their name based on WHO is offering them. Committing to ISU early historically doesn’t do you any favors.

In conclusion, I don’t think stars mean **** if the staff doesn’t know how to develop. Look no further than the fall of Miami & Texas football following their most recent championship runs.

 

[VeloClone]

People sometimes make the argument that more three star, two star,...unranked players get drafted than four and five star recruits so stars don't matter. But that is simply because there are far fewer four and five star recruits. Look at the percentage of five stars that get drafted, the percentage of four stars who hear their name on draft day, and so on you will find that having more stars does increase the chances of being successful in football.

 

[ClonesFTW]

55-60% of 5 stars are drafted
20-25% of 4 stars are drafted
5-6% of 3 stars are drafted
1% of 2 stars or less are drafted

For example the 2018 draft breakdown:

5 star - 19 draft picks
4 star - 70 draft picks
3 star - 106 draft picks
2 star- 19 draft picks
NR- 42 draft picks

The percentages above help to see how big of a pool each level of stars has.

 

[Cydkar]

I've been happy to see a steady flow of 3 Star athletes. I wanted to open this question to you smart football fans. I have often wondered how important stars really are. E.g. How much better is a 3 star athlete than a 4? Might 3 star athletes have a higher ceiling sometimes? I would imagine for instance, there is data on how often a 3 star recruit goes pro vs a 4 Star. (or say, data on their relative collegiate success!) Also regarding recruiting class rating: If our ISU recruiting class for next year is no. 36, middle of the Big12 pack (think i read this somewhere) is that considered underachieving for a program with top 20 ambitions. Any other questions on this topic??

Peace and love to you all.

Evaluation, character, and fit. Where the stars end up is beside the point. Stars are for fans and websites. Obviously 5 stars are probably more talented than 3 stars but that doesn't mean development continues at the same pace in college.

Texas struggled for years while having 4-5 star athletes. Lots of ingredients in the successful program stew.

All things being equal you want the 5 star guy (assuming they have been evaluated correctly)...I'm not naive.

 

[SouthJerseyCy]

From Rivals.com: Here are ISU 4 star or better signees since 2006.
Sedrick Johnson
Jake Campos
Alan Lazard
Sean Foster
Joseph Scates

 

[surly]

These threads generally are found on sites of schools who don't recruit four and five-star youngsters.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

These threads generally are found on sites of schools who don't recruit four and five-star youngsters.

Shut up Surly. Just kidding

 

[tolfbfan]

I think that 3 star covers a very large range of athletes, so I think what the 4th star gives the average fan is just a higher confidence that they're going to be a productive player. It just you confidence that a separate entity from your coaching staff likes the player a lot as well. I think any program can find 3-star guys they consider to be 4-star talents, but some just have to find more of those.

Or, could it be that some recruits travel all over the country to get exposure, while others visit just a few. The more these recruiting services see you at their events, the more it helps your rating [You have to have the skills...]. My son went to 3-4 events for one service and none for the other. Rivals/Scout, can't remember which. The other service called him many times trying to get him to attend their event. He and I was tired of the rat race and refused. Longer travel.The one he went to, rated him a solid three star, the one he didn't rated him a 2 star. Ultimately, these services have to make money, so they ultimately will do what benefits the bottom line. Overall, I don't think ratings mean a damn thing. You have thousands of kids to look at to find 20 or 30 that fit your team. Services are for the fans!